Recommended Posts

I am a happy M(240) owner. I use it a lot, and, since I bought it in 2014, I almost no longer use my film M's. I even sold y M7, rarely use my M3 and M6, and the M4 is collecting dust !

I am happy with the M(240) results, apart from

1) high ISO results (I find colour ok until ISO 1600, B&W until 2500)

and

2) the problem with mixed lighting : shooting in artificial light is giving uneven results, and when combined with daylight, it is not reliable.

Most of the time I shoot with my 'lux 50, but I love my Noct and recently had my 'lux 75 serviced by Leica. Results are often stunning. I understand the SL is a great tool with those lenses.

My wife is pregnant and we expect a little baby in october. I really want a nice tool get thousands of pictures, and high ISO is a criteria!When the M10 was announced, I quickly thought about buying one because of better high iso, better colour results with combined lighting and because of WiFi (getting the SD card out of the camera after unlocking the half-case in PITA), and sell the M(240) at quite a loss.

After some thought, and given the recent SL price adjustment, I am wondering if I should not keep my M(240) and buy a SL rather than buying a M10 and sell the M(240). In the long term, it could be not too bad an investment, since I could wait a couple of years before upgrading the M(240) and use the SL with both my Noct and 'lux 75 !

Any thoughts or comments welcome !

Didier

Dear all,

I am a happy M(240) owner. I use it a lot, and, since I bought it in 2014, I almost no longer use my film M's. I even sold y M7, rarely use my M3 and M6, and the M4 is collecting dust !

I am happy with the M(240) results, apart from

1) high ISO results (I find colour ok until ISO 1600, B&W until 2500)

and

2) the problem with mixed lighting : shooting in artificial light is giving uneven results, and when combined with daylight, it is not reliable.

Most of the time I shoot with my 'lux 50, but I love my Noct and recently had my 'lux 75 serviced by Leica. Results are often stunning. I understand the SL is a great tool with those lenses.

My wife is pregnant and we expect a little baby in october. I really want a nice tool get thousands of pictures, and high ISO is a criteria!When the M10 was announced, I quickly thought about buying one because of better high iso, better colour results with combined lighting and because of WiFi (getting the SD card out of the camera after unlocking the half-case in PITA), and sell the M(240) at quite a loss.

After some thought, and given the recent SL price adjustment, I am wondering if I should not keep my M(240) and buy a SL rather than buying a M10 and sell the M(240). In the long term, it could be not too bad an investment, since I could wait a couple of years before upgrading the M(240) and use the SL with both my Noct and 'lux 75 !

Any thoughts or comments welcome !

Didier

Dear all,I am a happy M(240) owner. I use it a lot, and, since I bought it in 2014, I almost no longer use my film M's I'va had for years.

I even sold y M7, rarely use my M3 and M6, and the M4 is collecting dust !I am happy with the M(240) results, apart from1) high ISO results (I find colour ok until ISO 1600, B&W until 2500)and2) the problem with mixed lighting : shooting in artificial light is giving uneven results, and when combined with daylight, it is not reliable.

Most of the time I shoot with my 'lux 50, but I love my Noct and recently had my 'lux 75 serviced by Leica. Results are often stunning. I understand the SL is a great tool with those lenses.

My wife is pregnant and we expect a little baby in october. I really want a nice tool get thousands of pictures, and high ISO is a criteria!When the M10 was announced, I quickly thought about buying one because of better high iso, better colour results with combined lighting and because of WiFi (getting the SD card out of the camera after unlocking the half-case in PITA), and sell the M(240) at quite a loss.

After some thought, and given the recent SL price adjustment, I am wondering if I should not keep my M(240) and buy a SL rather than buying a M10 and sell the M(240). In the long term, it could be not too bad an investment, since I could wait a couple of years before upgrading the M(240) and use the SL with both my Noct and 'lux 75 !

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Advertisement

I am a happy M9 and MM owner, I have a similar slew of lenses including the Nocti and the 75 Lux. I use the 50 AA a lot lately. Years ago when my daughter was born ( pre digital) I sold all my old slow gear and got a PhD camera. (Push Here Dummy) It was great for those shots, although I wouldn't necessarily do that today!

I bought an SL last week with the 24-90 and a M adapter. I have no intent of selling my M series cameras but I wanted something that gave me the option of zoom, autofocus, and the ability to mount my M glass. I've been just playing with it for the last few days and while it's a beast compared to a M with say the 35 cron, and it's heavier than the M with the Noctilux, it's very manageable and I like the 24-90 lens, it's got great reach and the camera performs very well in mixed lighting. I had visited an old friend and he had a Sony A9 with their new master series zoom lens and I was impressed enough to start looking at SL again. I have yet to mount any M lenses, but I expect I will soon.

My $0.2, for all the reasons that you mention above, the SL should fit the bill. I think you'll find that it's much faster than shooting with an M especially if you are shooting with wide open apertures.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I'm not sure you will get much benefit using your Noct and 75/2 with the SL over the M10 ...... the easier focussing on the new camera has somewhat negated the SL's superior EVF advantage.

High iso performance from what I can gather is going to be no better than the M10 ....... and possibly worse. Mixed light performance with the SL is very good .... but I suspect this is also now fixed on the M10 as well with a new sensor and firmware.

...... but the SL + 24-90 zoom AF is a different story ...... image stabilisation gets you 4-6 stops of useful light and autofocus is fast and accurate .... even at fairly low light levels, so you can keep ISO to 800 max in many situations.

The noctilux wide open is not much use close up .... images are a bit soft and DOF is minimal .... so close portraits are going to be better with the 75/2. The 24-90 zoom gives you reasonable DOF at its base focal lengths and is very versatile.

I'd be wary of recommending purchasing the SL on your current rationale based purely on documenting the first few years of your other anticipated new delivery ......

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Firstly congratulations on your impending life change. It's a hell of a ride. Hang on.....

I have the three cameras in consideration.

Get the camera your heart desires. And shoot the sh*t out of it. But......

I have a theory when it comes to kids. ALL kids weigh 45 kilos. That's the combined weight of the kid and all the crap you carry everywhere to keep them happy. As the kid gets bigger you carry less stuff but the combined mass is 45 kilos. Once the kid hits 45 kilos they're turning into adults and they can carry their own stuff.

The SL is a no go.

You DON'T want a camera that's too big, too complex and too in the way. You just won't use it. It'll stay at home, replaced by a change bag and you'll use your phone, all the time wishing you had something better. You *want* an M10. What you *need* is a TL. Or maybe a Q.

You need a camera you can operate with one hand. So you can get a shot of your bub when its 4 months old riding on mums shoulders, while you also push a pram full of survival gear. You'll appreciate a zoom lens because you want to capture moments. First smile that's not a fart. First crawl, walk, tantrum, food fight, bath, encounter with a puppy. You'll be shooting at baby level not adult level, for the next 5 years. Something you can carry IN the change bag not as well as the change bag.

I don't think high ISO is the real problem when shooting babies. If it is buy a SF40 and bounce that sucker. You just want an M10. So go get one.... But trust me when I say that you're favourite photos will no longer be the ones with stunning composition and gentle blur transitions. Nothing will be worse than a perfect smile, slightly out of focus.

Me..... I'd get a TL the zoom and the 35mm and enjoy shooting spontaneously. Keep your M. If you do go down the M route at least consider getting a DLux as well.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I have a M240 and SL+zooms, and although I'm in a generation above you, I've been photographing a new brood of grandchildren over the past few years.

I don't see the benefit you will get from the SL unless you get the zooms as well. Once the infants become rugrats, speed of focus is vital; on the other hand if you're shooting down at rugrat level on your elbows, manoevring a heavy camera can be difficult. I would either want to use the SL plus zooms (heavy though it is, the AF allows you to catch the moment) or the lighter M240/M10 with manual lenses: shot wide open while their immobile babies or strapped in a chair, stopped down as they start moving around. I doubt you will do much at f/0.95 or f/1.4 after the first year!

A lot of your shots will be indoors as well, so good high ISO performance will be helpful. The SL is a couple of stops better than the M240, and I understand the M10 is a bit better again. I don't have too much problem with the M240 indoors though, except towards the end of the day.

Edit: I agree with Gordon's comments about weight. As a grandfather, I don't have to worry about changing bags, nappies and spare clothes, so overlooked that aspect.

Edit: OTOH, I photographed my kids with a Leica M3, a Pentax MX and a Rolleiflex T - I didn't feel the need to go lighter or smaller back then.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I was going to say the SL but only with the zoom, and to be cautious about the weight. But on reflection I agree with Gordon. SL will be too heavy until the kids can carry their own stuff. If you want Leica I'd say the new TL is the best bet, assuming the focus speed has improved as per the reviews. Or else the Q and be willing to lose some pixels on digital zooming or cropping.

Link to post

Share on other sites

Advertisement

IMHO SL & M10 compliment each other while SL being the all rounder in function (strictly speaking one can use M lenses on SL while enjoying the reach AF provides with zooms) However the compactness and the approach to photography using an M camera with manual focusing toggling between LV and optical rangefinder cannot be provided by the SL. Being said, I keep both and use both on different occasions.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I'm in a similar position with a lovely 6 month old keeping me very busy . I have a M9P with 35 cron and a SL with 24-90, and have been contemplating the ideal setup recently. My M9P is great, love using it, and ideal for many situations but I dislike changing lenses at the best of times let alone when on baby duty, so there are moments that aren't captured (although that can be a positive), and occasional shots can be slightly out of focus. I also think that ideally you want to have the ability to take the occasional video clip, it doesnt have to be Hollywood cinematic, but many moments are nice to quickly capture on video as well as stills without having to pull your phone out. So for me the M9 can't be my only camera, and so that means possibly getting a m240, keeping the SL or getting a TL2. The SL + 24-90 is very flexible and versatile, with great video, and is great around home and on occasions when photography is important such as parties etc, but it is a bit big and heavy for casual walks and outings, it has to go in a bag rather than slung over your shoulder and hence often stays in the bag. I've considered getting a m240 but other than adding video, it has similar downsides to my M9P. The TL2 is very tempting but it's not as versatile as the SL and I'm not sure if I will gel with the user interface (can't really test one where I live so it's a bit of a leap of faith) but the size and weight is ideal as is the option of fast AF. But if you add the evf, its height isn't too far off the SL. I'm starting to think that the issue with the SL as a casual family camera is you want a fast AF zoom and the 24-90 is just a big too big and heavy. But maybe the SL with the TL 18-56 zoom is the best compromise - you can use m lens when you want DOF with easy MF using the great integrated Evf, can use the 24-90 when IQ is more important than size/weight, and use the T zooms when you need to go light and you can live with 10MP.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You sound like a young flexible man, so why should you stay in a single corner and do everything with a rangefinder camera.

Buy the SL and get many more opportunities - macro photos, tele photos, more control with UWA and the flexibility of zooms. Furthermore you get the possibility to use AF and OIS.

So for me very clear: The SL will widen your horizon and give you fresh capabilities.

Another point for the serious Leica user - the new SL lenses are simply even better than the M lenses. Try them, do not believe what people tell you without testing them.

So keep an open mind and buy a SL (sooner or later) you will never regret it.

I have a M246 and a SL and they live quite happily along each other - but I use the SL much more often. Since I have the SL I can use many different lenses from different manufacturers - e.g. also Leica R or even from the typical "adversaries" of Leica like Contax. Or even speciality lenses like T/S from Canon. My lens setup has no more gaps since then.

P.S. Don't believe, if you are told the SL is too big. The camera is actually about the size of an M, with a better grip for large lenses. At the moment the first 3 lenses are really big (each one has a weight larger than a kilo, while the body is only about 850g). But this will change soon with the coming of Summicron lenses. With these the SL combo is actually smaller than my R cameras. (The body is much slimmer).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Are you not clever enough to make a difference between a bulky lens and a bulky camera (which the SL is not) .

If the SL is bulky, then so is the M10. Silly discussion. Just use your eyes. (Or use a scales).

It's just as inappropriate as saying you will miss too many photos because there is no AF - again what a silly discussion. I would feel ashamed to talk such ......

I feel like attending a Kindergarten - no that's not true, usually the children at that age are not telling such rubbish. They still try to stick to the truth or reality.

Let's make a reality check (common in german television):

weight of M240 680g

weight of M240 with handgrip 680g + 200g ? (could not find the weight in the wiki)

weight of SL: 847g

weight of M to SL adapter

So in the end with the same lens the difference in weight is around 100-150g - a large part of that is due to the more powerful battery. (The difference between a bulky and a slim camera ?????) An important difference for a father/parent who is going to haul around 45 kg for the next few years.

With so much resistance against the SL from the classical M users, I am often surprised that the SL is still alive and kicking. Usually they recommend rather a Japanese horror box than a SL. Strange sort of brand loyalty. That was also the case when the SL came out - the worst "reports" came from long-time users of M cameras (film).

I know since 30 years, that I can live very well with both systems (M and R). Why not ? Why can't you simply let it live (live and let live).

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can fit my M10 with a small lens in my jacket pocket, which I can't do with an SL because the body is larger.

An SL body is about a third-again as heavy as an M10.

The SL has a grip which I find uncomfortable, and the M10 has no grip, which I prefer. I can add one if I feel the need though, but I very rarely do.

These differences may be important, irrelevant or even inapplicable to each individual, particularly subjective things like whether the grip is comfortable or not. You have to try to find out.

I prefer the viewfinder of the M10, and I have an EVF for the relatively rare and specific occasions when I need it. And I find the unique manual-focussing capability of the M10 the best focussing system I've ever used and I far prefer it for speed and predictability to an AF system. Using M lenses on an SL is a nice experience however. But it is a markedly different experience, so again, it's a personal choice.

The sensors and processors seem to be very similar but again the M10, being the more up-to-date, has a slight edge. It may well not be significant to you.

For my money, the M10 is the better camera but there are plenty of good reasons why other people might prefer an SL, particularly if it's in addition to an M240 as the OP states. But I would say that, just as you need to try an SL before you can decide whether size and weight and shape appeal to you or not, you need to try an M10 because it's a far more capable camera than an M240 in many ways.

Congratulation on your forthcoming baby! Any camera will do really, it's the subject that will always shine through.

PS...the M10 has no video. I always forget that because I don'r need it but I can see why it might be a very important factor for others.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

With so much resistance against the SL from the classical M users, I am often surprised that the SL is still alive and kicking. Usually they recommend rather a Japanese horror box than a SL. Strange sort of brand loyalty....

The disregard for the SL from traditional M users isn't a new phenomenon. Most of us also preferred 'Japanese horror boxes' when it came to SLRs. There wasn't a whole lot of love for R series cameras from M users in the film era.

There's obviously a big divide between those who buy Leicas from a sense of 'brand loyalty' and those who buy Ms simply because they like the viewfinder and form factor.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think Peter H's comment about video is quite sensible. With the M10 there is none, with the SL you get decent one.

In hindsight, I wished I'd spent more time videoing my daughter growing up as a baby and toddler.....the noises and movements of a child add massively to a record of your memories, if that is your goal.